Deviatkin O. E.

LITERATURE REVIEWS

Scentific article

The doctor who made a mistake, is exposed not only to the negative moral and ethical assessment from the surrounding, but also civil, legal, and sometimes criminal liability. An act of a physician is considered to be a criminal act, if he or she by virtue of the circumstances has not foreseen the consequences of his (her) actions, has shown frivolity or negligence. We allocate professional medical crimes; official medical crimes, official crimes in the field of non-medical activity; other crimes in the field of non-medical activity. Professional medical crimes are inextricably related to «medical cases», which remain one of the most difficult commission forensic medical expertises. The purpose of the work is to analyze modern approaches to conducting commission forensic expertises of «medical cases» and, in particular, to assess the correctness of pharmacotherapy. Main content. According to scientific literature, «medical cases» arise when patients, their family members or other interested persons initiate an investigation into the actions of physicians accused of adverse consequences of treatment or death of the patient. According to the current legislation of Ukraine, initially appoint an initial expertise to establish a health disorder or fact of a death, then appoint an additional expertise, which should determine the possibility of any spontaneous harm to the health of the victim. If it is proved that the damage to health could have been provoked by a physician, a commission assessment is made to detect errors in the actions of the physician and establish a causal relationship between these actions and the negative consequences. The provided medical treatment, including pharmacotherapy, is being analyzed in accordance with existing standards of treatment, as the criteria, standards and standards of the structure of the process and the result of medical care are developed and implemented in the health care system of Ukraine. However, the specificity of medicine lies in the fact that on the basis of clinical symptoms, the doctor makes an independent decision, based on his knowledge and experience, when the features of the organism and the pathological process are forced to depart from the protocol. The lawfulness of such deviations, in particular, in pharmacotherapy, should be assessed in the light of the special circumstances and circumstances where accurate protocol follow-up increases the risks to the patient (the principle of the appropriateness of indication). At the same time, the expert specialty «forensic medicine pharmacologist» is especially useful, as it is in other countries. Forensic pharmacology focuses on knowledge of the action and interaction of chemical compounds and drugs in a living organism and their application to legal issues. Usually, problems with the use of drugs in clinical practice are adverse reactions to drugs, drug interactions, systematic medical mistakes, unforeseen deficiencies or problems with drug quality. We know that Pharmacovigilance deals with the adverse effects of drugs. It can be used in forensic medical cases related to injury or death in the form of adverse reactions to drugs caused by counterfeiting, contamination, or falsification of medicinal products. Conclusion. Consequently, the medical error or the criminal actions of medical professionals are considered in forensic medicine by conducting commission expertise, the so-called «medical cases». Such examinations require high professional competence, needs careful study of medical records, and comparisons of performed diagnostic and treatment measures with well-known standards for the provision of medical care. Taking into account the experience of foreign countries, for the proper assessment of pharmacotherapy, one should consider the expediency of creating and listing in the register of experts such as forensic pharmacologists and specialists in forensic pharmacovigilance.

«medical case», medical mistake, professional crime in medicine, pharmacotherapy

1. Timofeev IV, Leontev OV. Meditsinskaya oshibka. Mediko-organizatsionnyie i pravovyie aspektyi. SPb; 2002. 308 s. [in Russian].
2. Pletenetska AO, Mishalov VD, Markov YuI. Suchasnyi stan pytannia pro sudovo-medychnы aspekty pomylok, shcho vynykaiut pry nadanni medychnoi dopomohy. Intehratyvna antropolohiia. 2014;1(23):63-8. [in Ukrainian].
3. Kryvda HF, Plevinskis PV, Kryvda RH, Sliusarenko OO, Umanskyi DO. Analiz rozpovsiudzhenosti defektiv nadannia medychnoi dopomohy za rezultatamy provedenykh sudovo-medychnykh komisiinykh ekspertyz v Odeskomu rehioni protiahom 2011-2015 rr. Dosiahnennia biolohii ta medytsyny. 2016;27(1):45-8. [in Ukrainian].
4. Stebliuk VV. Pravovi ta moralno-etychni aspekty kryminalnykh pravoporushen u sferi profesiinoi diialnosti medychnykh pratsivnykiv. Sudovomedychna ekspertyza. 2013;2:45-9. [in Ukrainian].
5. Ivshin IV. Sudebno-meditsinskie aspektyi professionalnyih prestupleniy meditsinskih rabotnikov protiv zhizni i zdorovya [dissertatsiya]. Moskva: 2006. 259 s. [in Russian].
6. Gubaydullin MI. Otsenka defektov okazaniya meditsinskoy pomoschi na gospitalnom etape postradavshim v dorozhno-transportnyih proisshestviyah. Sudebno-meditsinskaya ekspertiza. 2012;44(4):30-2. [in Russian].
7. Kovalev AV, Kadochnikov DS, Martemyanova AA. Kvalifikatsiya neokazaniya pomoschi bolnomu v sudebno-meditsinskoy praktike. Sudebnomeditsinskaya ekspertiza. 2015;58(1):4-8. [in Russian].
8. Shandyha-Hlushko OI, Kozytska NV, Kniazheva OM. Analiz komisiinykh sudovo-medychnykh ekspertyz, provedenykh u spravakh shchodo prytiahnennia do vidpovidalnosti medychnykh pratsivnykiv. Sudovo-medychna ekspertyza. 2015;2:95-101. [in Ukrainian].
9. Pletenetska AO. Sudovo-medychni ta pravovi aspekty pytan, poviazanykh z profesiinoiu diialnistiu medychnykh pratsivnykiv. Problemy klinichnoi pediatrii. 2016;31-32(1-2):126-31. [in Ukrainian].
10. Olkhovskyi VO, Khyzhniak VV. Aktualizatsiia pomylok u klinichnii medytsyni. Klinichna anatomiia ta operatyvna khirurhiia. 2010;9(2):118-20. [in Ukrainian].
11. Pletenetska AO, Bodnar SS, Berch AS, Ivasenko OM, Kutsyk YeM. Rezultaty analizu komisiinykh sudovo-medychnykh ekspertyz Zakarpatskoho oblasnoho biuro SME za faktom nenalezhnoho vykonannia profesiinykh oboviazkiv medychnymy pratsivnykamy. Visnyk problem biolohii i medytsyny. 2014;4(4):388-91. [in Ukrainian].
12. Kivalov SV, Mishchenko SM, Zakharchenko VIu, vidp. red. Kryminalnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy: naukovo-praktychnyi komentar. X.: Odissei; 2013. 1104 s. [in Ukrainian].
13. Tsyvilnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy. 2018. 238 s. [in Ukrainian].
14. Instruktsiia pro provedennia sudovo-medychnoi ekspertyzi, zatverdzhena nakazom MOZ Ukrainy «Pro rozvytok ta udoskonalennia sudovomedychnoi sluzhby Ukrainy» vid 17.01.1995, № 6 [Internet]. MOZ Ukrainy. K.; 1995. Dostupno: http:/ zakon.rada.gov.ua. Nazva z ekranu. [in Ukrainian].
15. «Haluzeva prohrama standartyzatsii medychnoi dopomohy na period do 2020 roku», zatverdzhena Nakazom MOZ Ukrainy vid 16.09.2011 № 597 «Pro zatverdzhennia Haluzevoi prohramy standartyzatsii medychnoi dopomohy na period do 2020 roku» [Internet]. Ministerstvo okhorony zdorovia Ukrainy. K.; 2011. Dostupno: http:// http://www.moz.gov.ua/ua. Nazva z ekranu. [in Ukrainian].
16. Stepanenko AV, Morozov AM, Chumak VT, ukladachi. Unifikovana metodyka z rozrobky klinichnykh nastanov, medychnykh standartiv, unifikovanykh klinichnykh protokoliv medychnoi dopomohy, lokalnykh protokoliv medychnoi dopomohy (klinichnykh marshrutiv patsiientiv) na zasadakh dokazovoi medytsyny (chastyna persha) [Internet]. K.: MOZ Ukrainy, DP «Derzhavnyi farmakolohichnyi tsentr MOZ Ukrainy», 2008. Dostupno: http // www.moz.gov.ua./ua. Nazva z ekranu. [in Ukrainian].
17. Kovalevskiy SM. Nekotoryie diskussionnyie pravovyie problemyi otvetstvennosti za meditsinskiy vred i ego vozmeschenie. Sotsialnoe i pensionnoe pravo. 2014;1:18-28. [in Russian].
18. Zakon Ukrainy «Pro sudovu ekspertyzu» [Internet]. Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy (VVR) K., 2004;28:232. Dostupno: http://zakon.rada. gov.ua. Nazva z ekranu. [in Ukrainian].
19. Malve HO. Forensic pharmacology: An important and evolving subspecialty needs recognition in India. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2016 AprJun;8(2):92-7.
20. Anderson PD. The broad field of forensic pharmacy. J Pharm Pract. 2012;25:7-12.
21. Merigian K, Blaho K. The role of pharmacology and forensics in the death of an asthmatic. J Anal Toxicol. 1995;19:522-8.
22. Zedeck BE, Zedeck MS. Introduction: the role of the forensic pharmacologist. In: Kobilinsky L, editor. Inside Forensic Science: Forensic Pharmacology. 1st ed. New York: Infobase Publishing; 2007. p. 1-11.
23. Anderson PD. Forensic pharmacists engage in work relating to litigation, the regulatory process, or the criminal justice system. Introduction. J Pharm Pract. 2012;25:5-6.
24. Tietelbaum DT. Introduction to toxicology: environmental and occupational. In: Katzung BG, Masters SB, Trevor AJ, editors. Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. 12th ed. USA: McGraw Hill; 2012. p. 1001-13.
25. Medhi B, Singh PK, Bansal YS, Setia P. Forensic pharmacokinetics: a new dimension for drug related medico legal cases. J Forensic Res. 2011;2:128.
26. Patel G. Postmortem drug levels: Innocent bystander or guilty as charged. J Pharm Pract. 2012;25:37-40.
27. Schulz M, Schmoldt A. Therapeutic and toxic blood concentrations of more than 500 drugs. Pharmazie. 1997;52:895-911.
28. Edwards IR, Body D. Forensic pharmacovigilance. Int J Risk Saf Med. 2012;24:1-2.
29. Belova IM, Belova OL, Luchinina EV, Levanov AN, Teplova EN. Oshibki farmakoterapii s pozitsiy klinicheskoy farmakologii. Byulleten meditsinskih Internet-konferentsiy. 2012;10:829-30. [in Russian].
30. Kuzmina AV, Asetskaya IL, Zyiryanov SK, Polivanov VA. Oshibki primeneniya lekarstvennyih preparatov: sovremennoe sostoyanie problemyi. Lechebnoe delo. 2015;3:17-27. [in Russian].
31. Kuzmina AV, Asetskaya IL, Polivanov VA, Zyiryanov SK. Meditsinskie oshibki pri primenenii lekarstvennyih preparatov v prakticheskom zdravoohranenii. Prakticheskaya pulmonologiya. 2016;3:76-83. [in Russian].
32. Body D, Edwards IR, Hartigan Go K, Healy D, Herxheimer A, Labadie J. Is there a need for forensic pharmacovigilance as a specialty? Int J Risk Saf Med. 2011;23:31-42.
33. Labadie J. Forensic pharmacovigilance and substandard or counterfeit drugs. Int J Risk Saf Med. 2012;24:37-9.
34. Pandit MS, Pandit S. Medical negligence: criminal prosecution of medical professionals, importance of medical evidence: some guidelines for medical practitioners. Indian J Urol. 2009 Jul-Sep;25(3):379-83.
35. Chernyak VV, Devyatkin OE, Mystafina GM, Nikiforov AG. Sluchayi samoubiystva s mnozhestvennyimi povrezhdeniyami ostrymi predmetami. Wiadomosci Lekarskie. 2017;1:152-5. [in Russian].

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine» Issue 1 Part 1 (148), 2019 year, 24-28 pages, index UDK 615:616-035.7:34

10.29254/2077-4214-2019-1-1-148-24-28